There has been rather more to-ing and fro-ing than actual work, it seems.
I am happy to schedule a teleconference, and to ensure that Anne is
available (as editor of XHR I think he is a critical resource). But we
need to establish an agenda. (I am also trying to organise a face to face
meeting to ensure that we can work as rapidly as possible - people are
implementing stuff now and I would hate things to slow down to the point
where people effectively opt out of the standards process and just ship
something different).
Before trying to schedule a teleconference, we need an agenda. As Maciej
and others have noted, these are potentially complicated issues and we
need to have reading time before the meeting in order to avoid wasting
valuable teleconference time.
The results of the survey on simply sopting IE's approach were pretty
conclusive. The reasons given seem pretty clear, such as a desire not to
fork requests in the first place, a belief that moving security risk from
the implementation of requests to each specific use of a request actually
increases the risk for end-users.
Microsoft apparently feels that there are reasons to implement something
other than the standard approach being developed, since they did so and I
presume it was not from bloody-mindedness or ignorance. In order to
usefully address these issues we need to understand them. Which means we
are waiting on Microsoft to provide written feedback.
Given the months that elapsed between the last time feedback was promised
and when it was delivereed, I am reluctant to schedule teleconferences
before such feedback is provided, at least sufficient to justify holding a
teleconference.
cheers
Chaals (as chair, webapi woring group)
On Sat, 03 May 2008 00:51:27 +0100, Sunava Dutta
<sunavad@windows.microsoft.com> wrote:
> Maciej wrote:
> " I would also prefer to see a clear statement of Microsoft's position
> in written form ahead of the telecon. By their nature, these are
> issues that need careful analysis, and cannot be evaluated fully in
> the context of a teleconference."
>
> I think the request will help discussion. Yes, we will be making our
> position and points that need further deliberation available in a
> written form prior to the teleconference.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Maciej Stachowiak [mailto:mjs@apple.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 5:01 PM
> To: Ian Hickson
> Cc: Chris Wilson; Anne van Kesteren; Sunava Dutta; Web API WG (public);
> public-appformats@w3.org; Eric Lawrence; Zhenbin Xu; Gideon Cohn;
> Sharath Udupa; Doug Stamper; Marc Silbey
> Subject: Re: IE Team's Proposal for Cross Site Requests
>
>
> On Apr 29, 2008, at 2:14 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>
>>
>> On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>>
>>> Given the multitude of issues raised, and the obvious back-and-forth
>>> that denotes many differing opinions, I'd suggest having a telecom to
>>> discuss these questions, and make sure that Sunava, Eric and myself
>>> can
>>> attend.
>>
>> I'm with Anne on this. Please reply to the e-mails before convening a
>> telecon. It is very difficult to carefully consider feedback in the
>> context of a telecon.
>>
>> The problem isn't "back-and-forth" denoting "many differing
>> opinions", the
>> problem is that we don't know what Microsoft's opinion _is_.
>>
>> Telecons are by their nature much less open, and minutes are almost
>> uniformly so poor that it is hard to impossible to get precise
>> technical
>> details out of telecons. A telecon would not be appropriate at this
>> point.
>
> I would also prefer to see a clear statement of Microsoft's position
> in written form ahead of the telecon. By their nature, these are
> issues that need careful analysis, and cannot be evaluated fully in
> the context of a teleconference.
>
> Regards,
> Maciej
>
>
>
--
Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group
je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera 9.5: http://snapshot.opera.com